← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP/11429/2016dismissed for not pressed

Malaisamy, v. State Rep. By Inspector Of

2016-06-08Honourable Mr Justice S. Vaidyanathan2 pages

CRL.O.P.No.11429 of 2016 S.VAIDYANATHAN, J.

The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 09.05.2016 for an alleged offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC in Crime No.1332 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 13.04.2016, the petitioners posing as bank officials, collected Rs.15,000/- from the defacto complainant on the pretext of depositing the same in his account. But, the petitioners left the bank without depositing the money in the defacto complainant's account and cheated him .

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any such offence and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that they are in custody from 09.05.2016 and that he may be enlarged on bail. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that as far as the petitioners 1 and 2 are concerned, he is not pressing this petition.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) vehemently opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners on the ground that the

S.VAIDYANATHAN, J.

vrc petitioners are involved in 9 previous cases and that if the petitioners are released on bail, they will abscond and hinder investigation.

5. It is further submitted that the petitioners have been doing crimes at Madurai and Sivagangai and that they have shifted their venue to Chennai in the month of April and that on 13.04.2016, the petitioners are alleged to have received Rs.15000/- from the defacto complainant and without depositing, they have escaped from the scene and prior to this occurrence, on 05.04.2016, they have alleged to have pick pocketed a purse and on the very same day, four withdrawals have been made through ATMs using the card available in the said purse and that there are more than 9 cases pending against the petitioners and that nearly Rs.3 lakhs amount have got to be recovered with regard to all the 9 cases. Taking note of all these facts, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners and this petition is dismissed.

08.06.2016 vrc CRL.O.P.No.11429 of 2016